LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



ii nil ill i in i hi! 

027 531 526 6 , 



r £;sv& 






DS 681 



r- 5 




.U4 C6 
Copy 1 



Policy Relative to the Philippine Islands. 



SPEECH 



HON. ALEXANDER S. CLAY, 

of georgia, 

In the Senate of the United States, 

Thursday, March 1, 1900, 

On the joint resolution (S. R. 53) defining the policy of the United States rela- 
tive to the Philippine Islands, introduced by Mr. Beveridge January 4, 
1900, as follows: 
"A joint resolution (S. R. 53) defining the policy of the United States relative 
to the Philippine Islands. 
"Resolved bxj the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of 
America in Congress assembled, That the Philippine Islands are territory be- 
longing to the United States; that it is the intention of the United States to 
retain them as such and to establish and maintain such governmental control 
throughout the archipelago as the situation may demand." 

Mr. CLAY said: 

Mr. President: In addressing myself to the resolutions which 
have just been read. I speak from the standpoint of one who voted 
in favor of the ratification of the treaty. The remarks which I 
shall make, however, will be perfectly consistent with the views 
I entertained and expressed before and at the time the treaty was 
ratified. The reasons which induced me to cast that vote were 
fully explained at the time, and I do not deem it necessary lo reit- 
erate those views. I took occasion then to announce on the floor 
of the Senate that I favored a declaration on the part of Congress 
setting forth fully that it was not the purpose of our Government 
to hold and govern the Philippine Islands permanently against the 
consent of their population, but, on the contrary, we should give 
to them every assurance by legislative action that our purpose 
was to grant them independence and to assist them in forming a 
government which shall be free and independent, one suitable to 
their conditions and surroundings, one capable of maintaining 
law and order, one fully capable of discnarging international obli- 
gations, and a government that would enable them to realize the 
best aspirations of the people of those islands. 

During the discussion of the treaty no Senator, so far as I re- 
memberT belonging to either political party contended on the floor 
of the Senate that our Government should permanently retain 
these islands and govern them against the will of the inhabitants. 
If such a purpose was entertained by either the President or any 
member of the Senate, no expression indicating such purpose can 
be found in the record of the public debates or in any official 
paper from the executive branch of the Government. 

1 remember well the substance of an expression that came from 
the senior Senator from Ohio [Mr. ForakerJ , and which appar- 
ently met the approval of those most ardently in favor of the rati- 
4273 1 






2 

fication of the treaty. The Congressional Record contains the 
language of the honorable Senator. I repeat his exact words: 

I do not understand anybody to be proposing to take the Philippine Islands 
with the idea and view of permanently holding them and denying to the peo- 
ple there the right to have a government of their own, if they are capable of 
it and want to establish it. I do not understand that anybody wants to do 
that. I have not heard of anybody who wants to do that. The President of 
the United States does not, I know, and no Senator in this Chamber has made 
any such statement. 

Now, mark you, Mr. President, this is very strong language, 
coming from the distinguished Senator from Ohio, the home of 
the President, and used on the floor of the Senate just before the 
vote was taken on the ratification of the treaty. Mark you. the 
Senator declared that he knew that the President of the United 
States did not intend permanently to hold these islands and to 
deny to the people the right to have a government of their own. 

The junior Senator from Massachusetts [Mr. Lodge] delivered 
an eloquent and forcible speech in favor of the ratification of the 
treaty. 

I have taken the trouble to read it most carefully, and the lan- 
guage used upon the occasion could have but one interpretation. 
After the treaty was ratified, his views, as expressed at that time, 
were in favor of legislation by Congress granting to the Filipinos 
the right of self-government. To show that my construction of 
his language is correct, I quote from his speech delivered in the 
Senate his exact language as to the future government of the 
Filipinos. He said: 

Suppose we ratify the treaty. The islands pass from the possession of 
Spain into our possession without committing us to any policy. I believe we 
shall have the wisdom »ot to attempt to incorporate those islands with our 
body politic or make their inhabitants a part of our citizenship. I believe 
we shall have the wisdom, the self-restraint, and the ability to restore peace 
and order in those islands and give their people the opportunity for self-gov- 
ernment and for freedom under the protecting shield of the United States 
until the time shall come when they shall stand alone. 

The junior Senator from Massachusetts also said in the same 
speech: 

I want no subject races and no vassal States. That we had by the fortunes 
of war assumed a great responsibility in the Philippines; that we ought to 
give to those people an opportunity for freedom, for peace, and for self-gov- 
ernment. 

I waut to get this country out of war and back to peace. I want to get the 
disposition and control of the Philippines out of the hands of the war power 
and place them where they belong— in the hands of Congress and the Presi- 
dent. I want to enter into a policy that shall enable us to give peace and 
self-government to the natives of those islands. The rejection of the treaty 
makes all of these things impossible. 

Every Senator who spoke in favor of the ratification of the 
treaty in legislative sessions except' two, who delivered constitu- 
tional arguments, contended at that time that Congress should 
take action in favor of self-government for the Filipinos after the 
treaty was ratified. The senior Senator from Colorado, who was 
an able and earnest advocate of the ratification of the treaty, took 
strong grounds at that time in favor of future action by Congress 
granting independence to these people. He said: 

There are few people in the world incapable of self-government. I be- 
lieve the people of Luzon are capable of self-government now. I beliove the 
people of some of the islands are. I do not know but all are. Mr. President, 
I keep in view this truth which I have stated, which I believe to bo a truth, 
that the people are entitled to a government of their own making, and that 
we have no right to say, " Your standard is so low you will create a govern- 
ment which we can not affirm; therefore you can not have a government of 
your own." They are entitled to only such a government as they themselves 
can maintain; it must be one producing order and protection to persons and 
property, for otherwise it is not a government at all. 
4273 






This is not all lie said. He continued: 

We shall make a mistake if we make up our minds that we are going to 
govern these people from here, that wo are going to govern them with Anglo- 
Saxons whom we send out there from hore to administer the affairs of that 
country. You will need 50,0U0 soldiers; in a little while you will need more, 
for they are a great people. They are a poople who are willing to contend 
for their liberty, and I believe it also to be an axiom that a people who will 
fight for their liberty and who are willing to die for it are capable of main- 
taining it. 

To further demonstrate that those.who contended that the treaty- 
should be ratified gave assurances immediately afterwards that 
legislation would follow declaring it our purpose to deal with 
these people as we had dealt with Cuba, I quote from the speech 
of the junior Senator from Colorado, who said: 

There are no questions, Mr. President, raised by these resolutions or their 
amendments that could not be equally well and satisfactorily dealt with 
after the treaty shall have been ratified. 

The senior Senator from New York, who made a' speech in favor 
of the ratification of the treaty, declared in the same speech that 
there was no reason why an American Senator should misunder- 
stand that we would approach the Philippine problem with any 
other than the most benevolent intentions concerning the Fili- 
pinos and their future. He said in substance that there is no 
American in all this broad land who wishes any other fate to any 
single native of the Philippine Islands than his free enjoyment of 
a prosperous life. 

In the exciting debate on the resolution declaring war against 
the Government of Spain the senior Senator from Vermont, who 
had just returned from the island of Cuba, delivered a remarkable 
speech on the situation in that island, in which he said: 

I am not in favor of annexation, not because I would apprehend any par- 
ticular trouble from it, but because it is not a wise policy to take in any people 
of foreign tongue and training and without strong guiding American ele- 



The distinguished senior Senator from Nebraska [Mr. Thurs- 
ton], speaking on the same subject, declared that— 

I am unalterably opposed to any departure from the declared policy of the 
fathers, which would start this Republic, for the first time, upon a career of 
conquest and dominion, utterly at variance with the avowed purpose and 
manifest destiny of our republican Government. 

If such strong language could be used in regard to the popula- 
tion of Cuba, how much stronger would be the force of an argu- 
ment against the permanent retention of the population of the 
Philippine Islands. If the views of Senators are consistent with 
utterances heretofore made on the floor of the Senate, a majority 
of the members of the Senate are against the permanent retention 
of the Philippine Islands. The counsel and wisdom of President 
Garfield was at one time highly esteemed by the Republican party. 
Would it not be well for us to reflect and remember that he said: 

We occupy a portion of the great North American zone which girdles the 
world, and which has been the theater of the greatest achievements of civili- 
zation, especially in the history of the Anglo-Saxon races, but should we ex- 
tend our possessions into the tropical belt we would weaken the power of 
our Government. 

During the debate on the ratification of the treaty the senior 
Senator from Delaware, probably closer to the Administration at 
that time than any other Democratic Senator, speaking of these 
islands, said: 

Now we have them, it does not follow that we are committed to a colonial 
policy or to a violation of those great principles of liberty and self-govern- 
4273 



ment which must always remain American ideals if our own free institutions 
are to endure. No country, and this country least of all, can afford to tram- 
ple on its ideals. I have no fear that it will do so. 

The distinguished Senator did not stop here, he went further: 

I assure you, with some knowledge of whereof I speak, that the President 
is committed to no policy calculated to discourage, much less strike down, 
the aspirations of liberty-loving people all over the world. 

The Senator was a member of the Peace Commission negotiating 
the terms of peace at Paris, and was an earnest, able, influential 
Senator in favor of the ratification of the treaty. At that time 
all those who spoke for ratification took the position that when 
Spain relinquished her sovereignty over the Philippine Islands and 
ceded them to the United States such a course cleared the way 
for the recognition of a Philippine republic by our Government. 

No one contended that such ratification precluded our Govern- 
ment from taking immediate action favorable to the independence 
of those people, but, on the contrary, freed us from complications 
with Spain, settled the war, and thus cleared the way for favor- 
able action by Congress for the future government of the Filipinos. 
It is only of recent date that the secret purpose of those who now 
declare that our Government shall change the policy of a lifetime 
and deprive the people of their long-cherished hopes, has been 
known to have existed from the beginning. I cast my vote in favor 
of a declaration of policy looking forward to the independence of 
these people, and subsequent events have demonstrated that we 
made a serious blunder when we failed to pass such a resolution. 
But, Mr. President, I do not care to devote too much of my time 
to the past, but it is essential to understand the past in order to 
prepare for the future. Let us trace the interesting history of our 
connections with the Philippine people since the commencement 
of the war with Spain, and let us see what were our relations 
with this people from the time we met them until the breach 
occurred, and" let us probe to the bottom and ascertain the causes 
which led to hostilities, and then let us see, even at this late day, 
if we can not apply a remedy that is just, that will restore peace 
and preserve our honor and free institutions, and at the same time 
grant justice to a struggling, helpless people. 

Dewey destroyed the Spanish fleet May 1, 1898. The city of 
Manila surrendered to our Government on August 13 following. 
The treaty of peace was ratified February 6, 1899. It has been 
more than twelve months since the ratification took place, and 
while it was openly avowed by those who led the fight in favor of 
ratification that so soon as the treaty was ratified then would be the 
time for Congress to take action for an independent government 
for these people, not a word or line has come from them fulfilling 
this promise!" They now have changed their plans and openly 
avow that we shall maintain permanent dominion over the islands 
and govern them forever as our dependencies by Americans and 
absolutely denying them the right of seli'-government. No fair 
and impartial mind can reach any other conclusion than that the 
want of a fixed and just policy in keeping with the principles of 
our Government, pointing out the manner in which we intended 
to deal with this people, showing that we were a just and liberty- 
loving people, is the prime cause of all the trouble heretofore and 
now existing between the insurgents and our Government. 

I have already said that Dewey destroyed the Spanish fleet May 
1, 1898. When'he was ordered to Manila the common American 
mind knew scarcely anything about the Philippine Islands and 
their population. We knew nothing about the relations existing 

4273 



between the Government of Spain and these people. We soon 
ascertained that practically the same condition of affairs existed 
between the Filipinos and Spain that existed between Cuba and 
the Government of Spain. We soon learned that the Filipinos 
for hundreds of years had been rebelling against the Government 
of Spain and were now, like the Cubans, righting for their inde- 
pendence. A temporary peace had been made and the leader of 
the insurgents was then in exile, but in reality a condition of war 
existed between the insurgents and the Government of Spain. In 
tracing our relations with this people let us remember that shortly 
after Dewey destroyed the Spanish fleet our consul-general, Mr. 
Pratt, wired the Secretary of State, Mr. Day, after holding a con- 
sultation with General Aguinaldo, that Aguinaldo, at his (Mr. 
Pratt *s) instance, had gone to Manila to organize an insurgent 
army to crush the Government of Spain on those islands and to 
arrange with Dewey for cooperation with the insurgents. He 
also wired, at the same time, Commodore Dewey that General 
Aguinaldo would go to Manila and cooperate with American 
forces if desired. We all know that Dewey replied promptly: 

Tell Aguinaldo to come as soon as possible. 

Our consul-general assured the Secretary of State that this in- 
surgent leader was a man of ability and courage and worthy of the 
confidence that had been placed in him. General Otis tells us 
that the insurgent forces entered the city of Manila with our 
troops on August 13— the day the city surrendered— and held joint 
occupation with our forces. Up to this period the most cordial 
and friendly relations existed between the insurgents and our sol- 
diers. Both made common cause of battle against the ai my of 
Spain. The leaders of the insurgents spoke most touchingly and 
feelingly of the services rendered the Filipinos by the Americans. 
They openly avowed that the Americans, not from mercenary 
motives, but for the sake of humanity and the lamentations of so 
many persecuted people, have considered it opportune "to extend 
their protecting mantle to our beloved country." 

They spoke of Americans as their brothers and as their liber- 
ators. These people expressed to the United States, time and 
again, their deep and sincere gratitude for the efficient and disin- 
terested protection which our country had given them to help 
them shake off the yoke of the cruel and corrupt Spanish domina- 
tion. Thus far, at every stage of our intercourse with these peo- 
ple, the most amicable relations existed, and there was not the 
least possible friction. Even as late as the 22d of October, 1898, 
the insurgents declared that more than ever the Filipinos desired 
to live in peace and perfect harmony with the Americans. Their 
leaders declared that when it was possible for a formal conven- 
tion to pacify and harmonize the interests of the two peoples, 
then the suspicion of the masses of the insurgents would disappear. 
Actual hostilities between the insurgents and our army did not 
commence until February 5, 1899, the day before the peace treaty 
was ratified. 

Let us, however, Mr. President, not forget that our Govern- 
ment knew before the army of the insurgents cooperated with 
our soldiers to destroy Spanish sovereignty in those islands that 
the Filipinos aspired to independence. At every step in the his- 
tory of the cooperation of the American and insurgent forces the 
representatives of our Government were put on notice that the 
Filipino people would expect and demand at the hands of Ameri- 
cans their absolute freedom and independence when the Spanish 

" 4373 



6 

Government ceased to have authority and jurisdiction over the 
islands. General Otis said to them: "I will assure the people 
of the Philippine Islands the full measure of individual rights 
and liberties which is the heritage of a free people." Every com- 
munication addressed to our consuls or generals put our Govern- 
ment on notice that the Filipino people would never be satisfied 
with anything less than absolute independence. We knew this 
fact when Aguinaldo was landed in our war ship. We knew it 
when we asked him to organize the insurgent forces and to coop- 
erate with our Army. We knew it when both armies cooperated 
together and forced the surrender of the city of Manila, and the 
leaders of the insurgents were encouraged by the representatives 
of our Government, especially by Consul-General Pratt and our 
consul, Mr. Williams, as well as by General Anderson and Gen- 
eral Otis. 

While it is true that Secretary Day notified the representatives 
of our Government not to enter into any alliance with the insur- 
gents which might in any way complicate our Government and 
disavowed such acts of our representatives, these facts were never 
communicated to the leaders of the insurgents. Silence upon the 
part of our Government under such circumstances was calculated 
to lead the Filipino people to expect that their most cherished 
hopes would be realized, and good faith on the part of our Gov- 
ernment demands that we shall not in any manner thwart their 
laudable aspirations. 

Mr. President, why did the Filipino people become suspicious 
of the Americans? Why did the suspicion ripen into anger and 
hate, culminating in open hostilities between the insurgents and 
our soldiers, resulting in the loss of many precious lives and the 
expenditure of hundreds of millions of dollars? Could Congress 
have, by a timely, wise, and conservative course, prevented this 
deplorable condition of affairs? Can Congress now, by prompt and 
decisive action, preserve the honor of our Government, save un- 
tarnished our free institutions, and at the same time put an end 
to this war? 

I will confess that the complications are more serious at this 
time than they were on the 6th of February last, but still prompt 
action upon our part even at this late hour will solve this complex 
problem. Mr. President, I do not insist that all of the suspicions 
the Philippine people entertained against our Government were 
well founded, but we must remember that these people had been 
oppressed by the Spanish Government for nearly three hundred 
years. They were suspicious, jealous, almost crushed, and dis- 
trustful, and a brave, generous, and patriotic people like the 
Americans should have made proper allowances for their many 
weaknesses. Intelligent and thoughtful public officials of our 
Government should have taken into consideration all the surround- 
ings of these people— their prejudices and peculiar environments— 
in every step taken after we landed upon these islands until all 
differences between the insurgents and our Government had been 
fully settled. But I must answer the question, Why did they 
become suspicious and turn from friend to enemy? 

I will let one speak in answer to this question, an American 
general, who was on the islands, came in contact with these peo- 
ple daily, was fully acquainted with their habits and aspirations. 
He certainly ought to be better authority on this subject than the 
eloquent junior Senator from Indiana, who spent a few weeks 
conversing with the Filipinos within the ranks of our own Army, 

4373 



and who knows absolutely nothing of the rural population or those 
in rebellion against our Government. General Otis ought to be 
good authority on this subject. After going on to state that the 
Filipino people had grown more suspicious of the friendly char- 
acter of the Americans and were gradually becoming hostile to 
our soldiers and Government, he summarizes the causes of their 
gradual estrangement to our soldiers and Government, and he 
tells us— 1 quote his exact words: 

Repeated conferences were held by us with influencial insurgents, whose 
chief aim appeared to be to obtain some authoritative expression on the 
intent of the United States with regard to the Philippines, and complained bit- 
terly that they were unable to discover anyone who could speak ex-cathedra. 
They asserted that theirs was a government de facto, which had the right to 
ask an expression of intent from the United States Government. 

They insisted after the war was over and Spain ceded the is- 
lands to the United States that they wanted an expression on the 
part of our Government as to what disposition we proposed to 
make of them — what assistance we proposed to give them in or- 
ganizing a government. They asked specially that we deal with 
them in the same friendly and magnanimous way in which we 
declared we would deal with Cuba. They did not insist that we 
withdraw our Army or our Navy from those islands. All they 
asked was an expression of opinion on the part of our Govern- 
ment that, we intended to grant them independence and self- 
government. They complained that the United States offered 
nothing advantageous to the Filipinos, who had expended so much 
blood and treasure for their independence. They began to have 
suspicions that the United States were to replace the odious domi- 
nation which Spain had exercised for centuries. 

They discussed among themselves the silence on the part of our 
Government as to the course we intended to pursue, and, whether 
right or wrong, they reached the conclusion that they had ex- 
changed a Spanish for an American master. General Otis tells 
us again that the masses of these people believe that certain words, 
as " sovereignty of the United States, "had peculiar meaning disas- 
trous to their welfare and significant of future political domina- 
tion like that from which they, had been recently freed; that this 
arose because they insisted that the United States had not shown 
by affirmative action the policy we intended to pursue toward 
them. Trace, if you will, the reports of every respectable repre- 
sentative of our Government from the time Dewey won his fa- 
mous naval victory till the conflict between the insurgents and 
our soldiers, and but one conclusion can be reached, and that con- 
clusion is that the great bulk of the Filipino people are a unit 
against annexation and in favor of a Filipino government, formed 
and put in operation by their own people. Mr. Wilcox, paymaster 
in the United States Navy, also Mr. Sergeant, whose high char- 
acter is vouched for by Admiral Dewey, tell us that there is much 
variety of feeling among the Filipinos with regard to the debt of 
gratitude they owe the United States. 

In every town they said we found those who said our nation saved 
them from slavery and others who claimed that without our inter- 
ference their independence would have been won. These same 
gentlemen tell us that on one point, however, they are united, 
viz, that whatever our Government may have done for them it 
has not gained the right to take their islands and annex them. 
General Otis tells us in his reports that this feeling is so strong 
among the natives that even the women gave him to understand 
that after all the men were killed off the islands they were prepared 
4273 



to shed their patriotic blood for the liberty and independence of their 
country. In the same connection he says the leaders of the in- 
surgents have made repeated efforts to secure some marks of rec- 
ognition for their government from American authorities, that 
their cry for liberty and independence and the vile aspersions of 
the motives of the United States have stirred up distrust and fear 
of the Americans. They claim not to understand the silence on 
the part of our Government. 

Our paymasters of the Navy, Mr. Willcox and Mr. Sergeant, 
who traveled more than 600 miles through these islands, coming 
in daily contact with the natives, and traversing more than seven 
provinces, endeavoring to obtain an accurate account of the re- 
sources of the country as well as to familiarize themselves with 
the habits, disposition, intelligence, and every possible character- 
istic of the people, make a report worthy of the thoughtful con- 
sideration of every patriotic, liberty-loving American. In describ- 
ing the sentiment among those people toward Americans they 
said: Already the hope was fading that freedom from Spain meant 
freedom of government; that the feeling toward Americans was 
changing, and we saw its effect in the cold manner of the people 
and in their evident desire to hustle us along by the most direct 
road to Manila. These gentlemen tell us that at first these people 
had absolute confidence in Americans and hailed us as the cham- 
pions of liberty. Gradually they drifted away from us, lost con- 
fidence in our patriotic purposes, all because the American Gov- 
ernment gave them no positive assurance of final independence. 

If every voter of the United States could read and understand 
the desire and struggles of these oppressed people, their appeals 
to us for that liberty for which our fathers fought, the tyranny 
and oppression which they had suffered and endured at the hands 
of Spain, and could then pursue closely their conduct and deport- 
ment from the surrender of Manila till hostilities begun, the 
American people, true to the traditions of our fathers, would 
grant to them, not grudgingly, but cheerfully and willingly, 
justice, liberty, and the right of self-government. I assert now, 
after careful consideration of the reports of Generai Otis, General 
Merritt, Admiral Dewey, as well as the reports of every other re- 
spectable representative our Government had on those islands, 
that hostilities could have been prevented if our Government at 
the proper time had given positive assurances that we intended that 
this people should be free and independent. Congress has now 
been in session for months. The President said that this prob- 
lem was one for Congress to solve. If we adjourn without taking 
action, those who have charge of the Government and are respon- 
sible for its administration will not only be responsible for the 
continuation of this war, but will by their silence have continued 
the perpetration of an irreparable wrong upon a helpless, strug- 
gling people, and will have traduced the good name and character 
of a Republic that has illustrated constitutional freedom in all its 
beneficence and power and which has always been our priceless 
inheritance. 

Mr. Burke, in his celebrated speech in favor of conciliation 
with America, declared that when England crushed out the aspira- 
tion of her colonies for liberty she struck a serious blow at her 
own institutions. Who can forget the famous words of the im- 
mortal Burke, when he said: 

For in order to prove that the Americans have no right to their liberties, 
we are every dav endeavoring to subvert the maxims which preserve the 
whole spirit of our own. To prove that the Americans ought not to be free, 
4273 



we are obliged to depreciate the value of freedom itself ; and we never seem 
to gain a paltry advantage over them in debate without attacking some of 
those principles or deriding some of those feelings for which our ancestors 
have shed their blood. 

Will not Americans endanger the free institutions of America 
and depreciate the value of freedom and republican institutions 
when we wrench from 10,000,000 people their country and ar- 
rogate to ourselves the right to appoint their public officers, to 
make and execute their laws, against the will and consent of the 
inhabitants? These islands contain a population more than three 
, times as large as ours when we won our independence from Eng- 
land. Do you suppose this vast population will consent for the 
United States to appoint their officers, to own their country, to 
make and execute their laws without a struggle for years? If 
you do you have not been observant of the history of nations. 
The senior Senator from Massachusetts [Mr. Hoar] told us the 
other day that God made all nations of the world capable of 
being influenced by the sam motives, and that the love of liberty 
does'not depend upon the color of the skin, but depends on hu- 
manity. The Senator declared that these people were God's chil- 
dren, and that a universal Father had implanted in their bosoms 
the same love of liberty and justice that we possess. The senti- 
ments so beautifully expressed ought to find a ready response in 
the hearts of the American people. 

I believe, even at this very hour, if Congress, with the approval 
of the President, will declare that the United States will assure 
the people of the Philippine Islands the full measure of individual 
rights and liberties which is the heritage of a free people, this wise, 
just, and friendly action will immediately end the war and secure 
to us the lasting gratitude and the honorable friendship of this 
people. If such action fails to accomplish this purpose, then we 
shall have done our duty and our course will be in keeping with 
reason and justice. In the solution of this question we are bound 
to consider the temper and character of these people. A love of 
freedom is the predominating feature which marks their lives since 
their early history; they are suspicious and restive, especially 
whenever they believe an attempt is being made to deprive them 
of self-government. These facts must be taken into consideration 
in dealing with these people. 

Two remarkable speeches have been made on the other side of 
this question, one by the junior Senator from Indiana, discussing 
the commercial side of this question, and the other by the junior 
Senator from Vermont, reviewing the situation from a legal and 
constitutional standpoint. Together they reached the conclusion 
that these islands are a rich and promising country, that the 
United States must keep and govern them forever, and can do so 
without any constitutional limitations whatever. The Senator 
from Indiana spoke eloquently of the salubrity of the climate, 
fertility of the soil, and the great mineral wealth of these posses- 
sions, but in the same connection he tells us that the ten millions 
of people who inhabit these islands are a barbarous race. Con- 
tinuing his remarks, he says the Filipino is the South Sea Malay 
put through a process of three hundred years of superstition and 
religion, dishonesty in dealing, disorder in habits of industry, and 
cruelty, caprice, and corruption in government. He does not stop 
here; he gives it as his own belief that there are not a hundred 
men among this vast population capable of comprehending what 
Anglo-Saxon government means. 

If the Senator's information be reliable, does he calculate for a 
minute what a responsibility our Government assumes when we 
4273 



10 

become responsible for the future government of this barbarous 
and ignorant race on the other side of the world, 10,000 miles away 
from our Capitol; especially, Mr. President, when this people 
have been conquered by our soldiers and have become embittered 
against the American people and look upon us with the same 
jealousy and hatred they have so long cherished toward Spain? 
Why, the eloquent Senator tells us that these people have fought 
Spain so long for their liberty that insurrection has become a 
fixed habit with them. 

Did the Senator ever contemplate that when we take the islands, 
together with their rivers, harbors, their minerals, and all the 
wealth so graphically pointed out by him, we necessarily take 
with them the very population which he describes as ignorant, 
barbarous, dishonest, indolent, corrupt, treacherous, and incapa- 
ble of understanding the elementary principles of Anglo-Saxon 
government? You can not separate the country from the popu- 
lation; when you take one you become responsible for the other. 

I will not say, however, that I place the same low estimate on 
this people as the Senator from Indiana doe3. Neither does his 
estimate correspond with the great weight of testimony of those 
who have made extensive investigations as to the intelligence, 
education, character, and capacity for self-government of the 
population of these islands. Our consul, Mr. Williams, said in 
his report to the Secretary of War: 

While the Spaniards barbarously and ciuielly slaughtered the Filipinos, 
even women and children, the insurgents, on the contrary, followed Ameri- 
can example— protected the helpless, nursed, fed, and cared for Spaniards 
taken as prisoners and for the wounded as they cared for those who had 
fallen from their own ranks. 

Admiral Dewey, in his report to the Secretary of War, said that 
in his opinion these people are superior in intelligence and more 
capable of self-government than the natives of Cuba, and said he 
was familiar with both races. He declared: 

The greater number seem to be able to read and write. In Manila are 
many thousands of educated natives who are merchants, lawyers, doctors, 
and priests. They are well informed and have accumulated property. 

It can not be contended that we are to hold these islands for 
future homes for the American citizen. A careful study of the 
territory and its population will show this to be impossible unless 
we should exterminate the natives, or, by reason of our cruelty 
toward them, they should abandon the islands. 

The present density of the population precludes the idea of 
American homes and American communities being built up there. 
These islands have been variously estimated at from 1,200 to 1,800 
in number. The important ones, however, are less than a dozen 
in number. Two-thirds of the population reside on six islands. 
All of the islands except about a dozen are exceedingly small and 
are of no value. The important islands are as follows: Luzon, 
Panay, Cebu, Leyte, Bohol, and Negros, with an area of 59,800 
square miles and with a population of 5,422.000. It can be readily 
seen that the population of the islands named is nearly 50 per cent 
greater than in Illinois or Indiana. We are told that in many of 
the provinces the density of the population exceeds 200 per square 
mile, and is greater than any of the United States, except Massa- 
chusets and Rhode Island. This is not a vast wilderness, unin- 
habited, where the American youth, by enterprise and industry, 
is to build cities and plant American homes. The present popu- 
lation precludes any such idea. Suppose the views of the junior 
Senator from Indiana should triumph, and we conquer these peo- 
4273 



11 

pie and force them to submit to American arms and to receive 
American government, how long, Mr. President, does the honor- 
able Senator think they will stay conquered? 

Remember, the population is between eight and ten millions and 
they have surrendered to American authority and accepted Amer- 
ican government by the force of an American army and navy. 
Sixty-five thousand American soldiers and sailors crossed the ocean 
and conquered them. I admit that we can conquer them, but how 
long will they stay conquered? How long before we will have to 
conquer them again? They will remain in subjection to our Gov- 
ernment just so long as we keep an army on the islands and a navy 
in their harbors strong and powerful enough to keep down insur- 
rection. When our ships sail home freighted with our gallant 
soldiers, this conquered race of Malays will rise up again in insur- 
rection against American rulers, American authority, and kill and 
murder your governor-general sent there to make and execute laws 
for them against their will. You will find it necessary to send an 
army to conquer them again and again. Experience will demon- 
strate to us the necessity of keeping them perpetually conquered. 
Sir, do we want a race of people that we must keep perpetually 
conquered by arms? Do we want a race of people that are hostile 
to our Government? 

Do we want a race of people annexed to the United States and 
governed by the United States who will be perpetually at war 
with us, continuously in a state of insurrection against our Gov- 
ernment and against our laws and sovereignty? Do we want a 
race of people that can never become American citizens, a race of 
subjects that shall never be the recipients of our free institutions, 
just and equal laws? Our matchless progress we owe to our rep- 
resentative free institutions, with equal rights, equal justice, and 
equal laws for every possible condition of our fellows. The laws 
of inequality should find no place upon our statute books. Here 
a homogeneous people are devoted to the flag of their country. 
They obey the laws, meet patriotically every duty they owe their 
country, because the spirit of justice, liberty, and equality has 
marked every step in our career. The Senator from Indiana 
made another remarkable statement on the floor of the Senate. 
He claimed to have studied Spain's military history on these 
islands. To my surprise, he tells us Spain's military operations 
were too lenient, not sufficiently vigorous and aggressive to con- 
quer these people. He complained that Spain was always treating 
with the rebels while they fought them. The inference to be 
drawn from his argument is that Spain should have been more 
cruel, more exacting, and more oppressive in her military opera- 
tions against this helpless people. 

The Senator tells us that the United States must not adopt the 
lenient course pursued by Spain, but we must be firm and rule 
them with an iron hand. Is it possible, Mr. President, that we 
have sounded such a depth in the decline of political administra- 
tions that we complain of the mercy, kindness, and leniency of 
the Spanish Government toward her struggling colonies and point 
out a pathway of tyranny, oppression, fire, and sword for the 
future control and government of the Philippine people? Less 
than two years ago the senior Senator from Vermont returned 
from Cuba and fired the hearts of the American people on account 
of the cruelty, suffering, starvation, and death inflicted b> the 
Spanish soldiers on the helpless women and children of the Cuban 
people. The wires flashed this tale of horror and suffering to 
every American home, and the American people, true to their 

4273 



12 

traditions, responded in pnrse and blood to save this struggling, 
starving people from the cruelty of Spain. 

Now, Mr. President, in less than two years the Senator from 
Indiana tells us that the American people must not tread in the 
pathway of leniency pursued by the kind, generous, and merciful 
Government of Spain, but, on the contrary, while we went to 
i war and sacrificed hundreds of lives and millions of money to give 
freedom to Cuba, we must reverse our conduct in dealing with 
the Filipinos, who were struggling under the same burdens and 
abuses that had cursed the people of Cuba. Such inconsistency 
is without a parallel, and brands the statement as false and hypo- 
critical that the United States Government went to war for the 
sake of humanity. 

Mr. President, I prefer the remedy suggested by the senior Sena- 
tor from Massachusetts, "Justice, righteousness, duty, and free- 
dom the only sure foundation of empire," to the remedy of fire 
and sword pointed out by the eloquent Senator from Indiana. 
The junior Senator from Indiana intersperses his argument with 
numerous Biblical quotations, but there is an entire absence 
throughout his remarkable speech of that blessed spirit of our 
Lord and Master which characterized His memorable Sermon on 
the Mount, " Therefore, all things whatsoever ye would that men 
should do to you, do ye even so to them, for this is the law and 
the prophets." It may be possible in this day of avarice, greed, 
selfishness, and commercialism that this Golden Rule shall no 
longer measure the conduct of either individuals or nations. The 
Senator from Indiana tells us that just beyond the Philippines are 
China's illimitable markets. He asked the question, " Where shall 
we turn for consumers of our surplus?" He says, ' ' Geography an- 
swers the question; China is our natural customer; the Philip- 
pines, " he claims, ' ' give us a base at the door of all the East. " He 
also said, "Nothing is so natural as trade with one's neighbors." 
He then tells us that the Philippines make us the nearest neigh- 
bor of all the East, and that nothing is more natural than to trade 
with those you know. He closes this part of his enticing picture 
with the statement that the Philippines bring us face to face with 
the most sought-for customers in the world. This fanciful and 
illusory picture will not stand the test of logic and reason. There 
is quite a difference between commercial and territorial expan- 
sion. One does not necessarily follow the other. I favor com- 
mercial expansion, but oppose the latter where applied to terri- 
tory beyond the Western Hemisphere. The proposition that we 
must own vast tracts of land, populated by a race of people that 
can never assimilate with our people, adjacent to Asia, across the 
Pacific, to induce the teeming millions of China to become our 
customers is absurd and is not supported by the laws of trade and 
commerce. 

No Senator upon this floor is more anxious to enlarge our mar- 
kets and to induce the vast population of China to purchase our 
surplus products of farm and factory, so as to give employment to 
labor and enhance the value of both the raw material and finished 
product of producer and manufacturer, than myself. Wars, en- 
tangled alliances, domestic insurrection, are not the proper means 
to induce foreign consumers to buy our goods and wares and to 
become our customers. The laws of business, commerce, and 
trade, friendly alliances, cheapness and quality in comparison 
with other countries contending for the same trade and business, 
are elements that must shape and regulate the volume of our busi- 
ness with other countries. Jefferson taught us that peace, com- 
4273 



13 

merce, and honest friendship with all nations went hand in hand 
together. But they tell us now that the teachings of Jefferson are 
not applicable to the times. These teachings are not in keeping 
with the advanced ideas of our political bosses. We can not sur- 
pass Europe in the race for wealth aud foreign trade by exhaust- 
ing our resources in internal quarrels, or in unjust and unprofit- 
able wars, waged to acquire and govern uncongenial races who 
can never become adapted to our laws and political institutions. 
If we desire the trade of China, we must make it to the interest of 
her people to trade with us. We must study their markets, the 
wants and demands of their people. We must cheapen transporta- 
tion by the construction of the Nicaraguan Canal; build up our 
merchant marine; take every possible advantage of the laws of 
trade and commerce to meet promptly the keen competition of 
England, Germany, France, or any other foreign country seeking 
to extend its trade to the markets of China. 

These rules, applicable to business principles and common sense, 
are the only means that will give to the American farmer and 
manufacturer foreign markets for American products. Neither 
do 1 agree to both propositions that if we keep the Philippines 
we will be neighbors to China and that it will be natural for our 
neighbors to trade with us. The course that we are pursuing 
toward the Philippine people will be just the reverse of the prop- 
osition stated by the Senator from Indiana. Certainly we can not 
expect to enlarge our volume of business with the Philippine peo- 
ple by waging war against them. A magnificent opportunity 
came to us when Spain surrendered her claim to the Philippine 
Islands to the United States for us to lay the foundation for large 
and continued commercial dealings with the population of the 
Philippine Islands. These people at that period, full of gratitude 
for the services which we had rendered them in achieving their 
supposed independence, would naturally have come to our mar- 
kets to make purchases rather than to any other country in the 
world. They then esteemed us with that affection which we felt 
toward France at the close of the Revolutionary war. If we had 
granted to them their most cherished hopes, given them our sym- 
pathy, encouragement, and aid in framing a constitution and 
putting in operation a government suitable to their wants, de- 
mands, and conditions, then the laws of gratitude would have 
made these people our customers against the markets of the world 
for all time to come. 

They are neighbors to China, coming almost in daily contact 
with the Chinese markets. Trading daily with the United States, 
and recognizing us as their friends and benefactors, they would 
have planted the good name, high character, and commercial ad- 
vantages which we enjoyed at the hands of the Philippine people 
into the hearts, consciences, and business of the population of 
China. Does any reasonable man contend that we can enlarge 
our business and commercial transactions with the Filipinos by 
waging war against them, embittering them against us now and 
for all time to come? Is it possible for any student of the laws of 
trade and business to contend that if the Filipino people are con- 
quered and kept in subjection to American authority by our sol- 
diers, that such a course would enlarge our trade with China? 
If this population of 10.000,000 people should learn to hate us, 
constantly being in insurrection against us, charge us with being 
their oppressors, as they did Spain, would it not be natural for this 
feeling of hate and distrust to be transplanted upon the shores of 
China, who in all probability would sympathize with their strug- 
4273 



14 

gling neighbors? If we desire the trade of the Philippines and 
the trade of China, let us by all means keep the Filipinos our 
friends and treat them as our neighbors. The argument advanced 
by the Senator from Indiana falls to the ground when brought to 
its final analysis, and the reverse of the proposition stated by him 
would certainly follow. It is conceded on all sides that this pop- 
ulation is never to be organized into States and to be treated as 
American citizens, but we are to hold them, make laws for their 
future government, appoint Americans for their officers to cross 
the ocean and rule this people. 

This 10,01)0,000 of population, located 10,000 miles away from our 
capital, are to be wards without any right to have an organized 
government of their own, but, on the contrary, their laws are to be 
made and their rulers appointed at Washington, on the opposite 
side of the world from them. It is not denied that never in the 
history of our Government has such a problem been presented 
to us for solution; never before have we undertaken to acquire 
territory and govern a race of people to whom we did not intend 
to extend all of the privileges granted to American citizens. Until 
during the present time the,proposition to acquire a people foreign 
to us in race, foreign to us in religion, unsuited to American in- 
stitutions, and to force a government on them that they did not 
want, would not have been tolerated by the American people. A 
desire for liberty, justice, self-government, freedom, and equality 
gave birth to this Republic. If we now change the only Govern- 
ment in the world that guarantees absolute freedom and equality 
to all of its citizens, recognizing the right of any people to form 
their own government, then, Mr. President, this Republic, that 
has been reared by more than a century of patriotic labor and sac- 
rifice, will no longer be the Government of Washington, Jefferson, 
Madison, Jackson, and Abraham Lincoln. The spirit of justice, 
equality, and freedom which has characterized its history, result- 
ing in the noblest achievements ever recorded in man's struggle 
for self-government, will no longer be our blessed heritage. 

Mr. President, we do not want to retain permanently a nation 
and be responsible for their government who never can partici- 
pate in our free institutions. We can not afford to take a hundred 
thousand soldiers from the peaceful pursuits of life and send 
them across the ocean to maintain military government on the 
Philippine Islands at a cost of a hundred millions of dollars a 
year to our people. We can not afford to do it. because it will be 
an injustice'to the American people and because it revolutionizes 
the entire scope and purpose of our Government and will inflict 
a great wrong upon a helpless, struggling, inferior race. I do 
not believe in a government that does not emanate from those to 
be governed and where the lawmaking power does not come in 
contact with the people to be affected, for the reason experience 
has demonstrated that a watchful and jealous constituency is es- 
sential to maintain honest and faithful public officials. Seven 
thousand miles of ocean lie between us and this people. 

No power on earth, Mr. President, can prevent the effect of this 
distance weakening government. Spain felt it in the admin- 
istration of her colonial policy in her South American possessions 
and in Cuba and the Philippine Islands; and now, Mr. President, 
we are undertaking to do something that destroyed Spain's navy 
and bankrupted her treasury. 

It is absolute folly to undertake to force and maintain a gov- 
ernment for an uncongenial race of people that occupy a territory 
that does not come within 7,000 miles of your coast and within 

4273 




15 

10,000 miles of your capital. Let us take warning, and remember 
that this new departure is contrary to the teachings of Washing- 
ton, Jefferson, Monroe, Lincoln, Garfield, Blaine, Sherman, Ed- 
munds, Reed, Carlisle, Cleveland, and Bryan. 

We have three resolutions pending before the Senate relating to 
the disposition and government of the Philippine Islands. One 
by the senior Senator from Wisconsin, which vests in the Presi- 
dent the right to govern the islands until Congress directs other- 
wise. The resolution of the junior Senator from Indiana, which 
declares that the islands are ours forever, and that we shall keep 
them and govern them as dependencies. The bill introduced by 
the Senator from Wisconsin leaves the policy of our Government 
toward these people to the future action of* Congress. They are 
left in doubt and uncertainty as to what they may expect from 
our Government. The second resolution contemplates that we 
will exercise permanent dominion over the islands, appointing 
their officers, making and executing their laws. The third reso- 
lution, introduced by my colleague, disclaims any intention on 
the part of our Government to maintain permanent dominion over 
this territory or to incorporate the inhabitants thereof as citizens 
of the United States, or to hold them as vassals or subjects. This 
resolution concedes the fact that these people fell to us as the re- 
sult of war, and that we must restore peace and maintain order 
throughout the islands until a government shall be established by 
the people there, with our assistance, capable of protecting the 
people from violence and maintaining law and order. It provides 
that our military forces shall be kept on the islands until the in- 
surrection is suppressed, and until a stable government can be put 
in operation. 

This resolution bears the blessed message to the Filipinos which 
they have so long sought in vain, namely, that it is the purpose 
and intention of the United States, when the insurrection is over, 
when peace and order shall be restored and a stable government 
established, that then we will withdraw our land and naval forces 
from the islands, reserving to our Government such harbors and 
tracts of land as may be needed for coaling stations and govern- 
mental purposes, and transferring to the government of the Fili- 
pinos all other rights and territories secured in said islands under 
the treaty with Spain, and leave the future control and dominion 
of the islands to the Filipino people. 

The resolution is most carefully guarded, discharges faithfully 
every duty we owe this people, as well as to carry out the obliga- 
tions and duties we owe to foreign governments resulting from 
the war. 

First, this resolution provides for the suppression of the insur- 
rection; second, that we will assist these people in putting into 
operation a government of their own that will maintain law and 
order; third, it protects the interests of the Government of the 
United States by reserving the necessary coaling stations and land 
needed for governmental purposes; fourth, it provides that until 
a stable government is established on the islands the President is 
empowered to maintain law and order there; fifth, that so soon 
as such a government shall be established by the people of those 
islands, with our assistance, we will withdraw our land and naval 
forces, leaving the future control to the peop'e thereof. 

If these resolutions do not cover every phase of the case, I do not 
understand the English language. Pass them and give them the 
effect of law, and then we will have pursued a course in the solu- 
tion of our troubles with this people which will be in keeping with 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS •] 

027 531 526 6 



16 

the principles of our Government. I do not believe we will ever 
reach a satisfactory solution of this problem, a solution in har- 
mony with the principles of our Government, by pursuing any 
cher course than one substantially as above outlined. Mr. Presi- 
dent, this course meets my approval, because humanity, reason, 
and justice dictate such a policy. I realize that if we force a 
military government upon these people against their will, the 
alienation existing between us will be an incurable one. I am 
unalterably opposed to the permanent retention of these islands 
with the view of forcing American government upon them by 
Americans, because I believe such government will cost the peo- 
ple of the United States a hundred and fifty million dollars ayear 
to pay the increased expenses of our Army and Navy to maintain 
mV itary government there, a tax of $2 per capita annually for 
5i j man, woman, and child in the United States. This does 
not take into consideration the sacrifice of human life that must 
necessarily follow in maintaining military government on those 
islands. It is a fact that can not be disputed that the expenses 
of maintaining our Army has already increased more than six- 
fold. 

The demoralization that follows war and the military spirit is 
always to be deplored. I am opposed to it again, Mr. President, 
because history teaches us that sovereignty acquired by the sword 
must be maintained by the same means and that power acquired 
by conquest and wealth gained by robbery are certain in the end 
to weaken and corrupt the possessor. This rule applies to nations 
as well as individuals. I am opposed to it again because by such 
a course we revolutionize our Government, which was intended 
for a free Republic and self-governing people and not for subjects 
or vassal states without representation in the making and execu- 
tion of our laws. I am opposed to it because it shatters the Mon- 
roe doctrine from top to bottom. I am opposed to it because I 
believe tr ' 5 at no distant day such a course will involve us in 
Eur ; ,nd Asiatic quarrels. I am opposed to it because all of 

the uciuits, traditions, surroundings, experience, education, and 
aspirations of this people are opposed to our theories of govern- 
ing. I am opposed to it because such a course would be a re- 
pua ation by our Government of the principle that all govern- 
r-on j must be founded on the consent of the governed. 

a opposed to it because such a course is not calculated to 
advance the interests and promote the happiness of this people, 
oelf-government does not mean that these people are to have such 
a government as we possess, but that these people shall have a 
government in keeping with their desires and suitable to their 
conditions. It has been said that greatness does not lie in coffers 
or territory, but it lies in the men and women of a nation and 
their ideals and acts, and that a nation is great as it clings to its 
ideals. A great bishop said: "The end of all worthy struggle is 
to establish morality as the basis of individual and national life, 
to make righteousness prevail, to make justice reign, to spread 
beauty, gentleness, wisdom, and peace, to widen opportunity, to 
increase good will, to move in the light of higher thoughts and 
larger hopes, to encourage science and art, to foster industry and 
thrift, education and culture, reverence and obedience, purity and 
love, honesty, sobriety, and disinterested devotion to the common 
good— this is the patriofs aim, this his ideal." If we should strive 
for this purpose and work in this spirit, tne Republic of our 
fathers will never perish. 

o 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



027 531 526 6 9 



